Quantcast

Comments about ‘Red roundup: Where does the Pac-12 rank?’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Aug. 26 2011 9:17 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
SoCalUtahFan
Utesville, CA

Classic Rock for a classy guy.

Utes has a great coach.
Utes play in a great BCS/AQ conference.
Utes has a great team.

What a great time to be a Ute!!!

Go Utes!
The future is RED --as red as red roses.

Mormon Ute
Kaysville, UT

Those rankings will certainly change now. With Utah, TCU and BYU leaving the MWC will drop. As the top teams in the PAC 12 continue to do well and others like ASU continue to improve the ranking should as well.

Johnson72
Salt Lake City, UT

It ranks better than independence.

TJ
Eagle Mountain, UT

Wouldn't it be a kick if BYU went to the BIG 12. They would be in the number 2 conference in the nation and would make it stronger. There would be some major Yning for a long, long time.

SoCalUtahFan
Utesville, CA

@Johnson72
...It ranks better than independence...

Indy does not even make it to the ranking...:)

Carson
Provo, UT

Dream on,TJ.

Rational
Salt Lake City, UT

Just so the Pac knows, There's a new kid in town.

Hellooo
Salt Lake City, UT

Nice to see comparison measure from all of the media, it seemed the PAC-12 was such a major jump, but the comparison shows MWC (in its past configuration with both the U and BYU) was pretty close. If that conference had staid together with the addition of BSU this year it would have been an interesting comparison because there would have been an improvement. Great time for Utah looks like they will be able to compete just fine in football in the "Conference of Champions".

CRB
Woods Cross, UT

Lets actually deal with facts here. The pac10 now 12 is often ranked lower preseason then moves up. Sagarin Ratings are as good as any and much more scientific than the opinions of a pundit. The Pac 10 generally has ended #1 or #2 and in these rankings each year. It also often has as many as 8 of the top 12 toughest schedules because they play a significantly harder non-conference than any other BCS league plays. This year the Pac 12 starts at #2 on the Sagarin behind the SEC which is typical at the beginning of the season. Nothing to complain about there.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Mormon Ute:

"Those rankings will certainly change now. With Utah, TCU and BYU leaving the MWC will drop."

You are correct that the rankings will change, but the MWC's won't by much.

Utah will take their 33-6 record [including Sugar Bowl season] with them to the Pac-12, but Boise State will take their 36-1 [including Fiesta Bowl season] with THEM to the MWC. So as far as movement goes, the Pac-12's goes up, the MWC's stands pat.

TCU will NOT take their 36-3 record [including Fiesta Bowl and Rose Bowl seasons] with them to the Big East since they don't leave until 2012, and the grading period runs from 2008 to the end of 2011. TCU will most certainly boost the Big East's score, but not until the 2012-2015 period. So again, the MWC stands pat.

The Y will take their 28-11 record with them into...well...nowhere really, but the drop would be marginal since the cougars didn't really take the world by storm during this period. No BCS bowls.

I hope the MWC is finally granted AQ status. They've been playing good football lately. I think they've earned it.

KamUte
South Jordan, UT

The MSU quarterback is pretty good. We need to make sure he doesn't have enough time to hit his targets. I remember McBride losing to a team like Utah State. It was embarassing.

Mormon Ute
Kaysville, UT

Naval Vet,

True that TCU's impact won't be felt until next season, but I hope the MWC doesn't get AQ status. Three schools that did all the work are leaving. The schools that are left, with the exception of BSU, don't deserve it.

TJ,

I don't think BYU by itself could replace what the Big 12 loses with Nebraska and Texas A&M leaving.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

I don't want to hear any nonsense from pundits who say the 2012-2015 MWC isn't the same MWC as the Utah/TCU-carried league. The BCS already set forth their requirements, and those requirements are "what had the conference DONE"; not "what do we expect the conference TO DO". If naysayers want to say that the MWC will not be as good now that the Utes and Frogs are gone, then they must explain:

(1) ...why hadn't the MWC been granted BCS status effective July 2008 -- since the "potential" to outpace conferences like the Big East and the ACC existed

and

(2) ...when will the BCS reimburse the MWC for the lost revenues from not being a part of the BCS.

Since obviously, retrograding a conference isn't practical, and "crystal-balling" the future isn't possible, I think the BCS should just stick to the blueprint. And THAT "blueprint" is "what have you done over the past 4 seasons?" And TCU was a member of the MWC those past 4. Whether or not Utah and TCU are no longer members is immaterial. If the MWC proves unworthy, then the BCS can rescind their AQ status effective 2016.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Since the Big East can't meet the required standards for AQ status, their standing should be revoked. Let us not forget that the Pres. of the NCAA at the time the BCS was formed that shut out the MWC was Mike Tranghrese...of the Big East. Mike justified the MWC's exclusion by stating they/we weren't competitive enough. And now that they ARE, and the Big East has not been, time to put the shoe on the other foot.

Mtn. West - IN; Big East - OUT; cougars mid-majors FOREVER

Go Pac-12!

GO UTES!

Rational
Salt Lake City, UT

The Utes have been good in the 2000's, no doubt about it. 5 of their 7 all-time end-of-year ranked teams (and I think Whitt has been part of 6 of the 7).

I don't think the effect of BYU leaving the MWCN is "marginal," Naval Vet. I believe rankings are part of the equation on qualifying for the BCS, and BYU was ranked in 2008 and 2009 -- two of the three years measured to date (5 times in the 2000's as well).

MiP
Iowa City, IA

"Plus, if USC (banned from the conference title game) wins the South, a team that finishes second in its division could win the first Pac-12 crown. That odious possibility would become embarrassing if Utah is that second-place team, because the Utes don't play either of the conference's two preseason top-
---The writer from San Fran

Serious? If Utah wins the PAC-12 "crown" it would mean they would have won the PAC-12 conference championship game...against, presumably, Oregon or Stanford. It may be unfair for the Utes to PLAY in the conference championship (or win the South division) if they are behind USC, but it would not be unfair for them to WIN the whole enchillada. Regarding USC...they should have thought of that earlier.

Utah can do themselves a big favor by being the clear cut winner of the South. That would silence writers like this. We'll see. That's my wish anyway.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments